Federal prosecutors have kept U.S. District Judge Thomas Porteous Jr. under scrutiny for more than three years in their wide-ranging criminal investigation into his personal bankruptcy case and favors he allegedly accepted from a corrupt Gretna bail bonds company.

Porteous has not been charged with any crime, but his attorney, Kyle Schonekas, acknowledged that prosecutors have also pursued a third angle: a convoluted hospital case that landed in Porteous' courtroom in January 1996, less than two years after President Clinton nominated him to the federal bench. Schonekas said he does not think the hospital case is the main focus of the federal investigation.

Attorneys from the public integrity section of the U.S. Department of Justice convened a grand jury at least four times in March, April and May to hear testimony from the judge's longtime secretary, Rhonda Danos, and from three lawyers who got involved in the hospital case only after it moved to Porteous' court, according to attorneys involved in the case.

One of the attorneys says the Washington-based prosecutors are exploring whether the judge's personal friendships with the three lawyers -- Jacob Amato, Leonard Levenson and Don Gardner -- influenced his decision in the dispute about what is now Kenner Regional Medical Center.

The inquiry hangs over Porteous at a time when he is tormented by personal troubles, including the sudden death of his wife in December and the loss of his home in Metairie to Hurricane Katrina. He has taken a six-month medical leave from the bench, and his attorney has indicated he might not return.

Schonekas said the judge has committed no crime and that he does not think an indictment is imminent.

"I would like people to withhold judgment until there is a culmination, " Schonekas said, "because I am adamant this guy has done nothing wrong."

Last-minute lawyers
The hospital case that prosecutors are now eyeing spanned almost a decade and involved a Byzantine series of claims and counterclaims from two companies seeking control of the hospital and its attached pharmacy.

It was a high-stakes feud that pitted Liljeberg Enterprises, the partnership that built the medical center and ran the pharmacy, against Lifemark Hospitals, which operated the hospital, helped finance its construction and later acquired it at public auction after a Liljeberg affiliate defaulted on a loan to another creditor.

Court records show that Liljeberg Enterprises hired Amato and Levenson in September 1996 -- three years after the lawsuit was filed in federal court, nine months after it was transferred to Porteous and less than two months before the trial was supposed to begin. The Liljeberg brothers, John and Robert, already had five attorneys working on the case.

Two weeks after Amato and Levenson came on board, Lifemark Hospitals asked Porteous to recuse himself from the case because of his "well-known" friendship with the two new lawyers.

Lifemark's attorneys took pains to say that Porteous probably could remain impartial, but they argued that he should eschew even the appearance of impropriety. They said a reasonable person could deduce that the Liljebergs might be trying to influence proceedings by hiring two lawyers -- personal injury lawyers at that -- so soon before the start of trial when they already had experienced counsel.

"The addition at the very last moment of two lawyers who are unfamiliar with the file is of questionable value as to potential contribution to the preparation and presentation of the evidence, " Lifemark's attorneys wrote. "The circumstances of their addition as counsel create concern because of their personal relationship with Your Honor."

Levenson countered in a memorandum to the court that Lifemark had offered "no evidence whatsoever" that Porteous had an "affinity" for him and Amato that might prejudice the ruling. Lifemark, he added, also did not allege that he and Amato and any business relationship with the judge.

Porteous chose not to remove himself from the case, and the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals backed him up.

Soon after that, in March 1997, Lifemark recruited another close friend of the judge's to its side: Don Gardner. Gardner said in a recent interview that Porteous is the godfather of his daughter.

Porteous found the case in favor of Liljeberg Enterprises, awarding the company $12.5 million in damages over the pharmacy contract and canceling the public sale at which Lifemark had acquired the hospital. The appeals court eventually reversed parts of his ruling, calling it "deeply flawed" and riddled with "clear error."

Friendships common
Schonekas confirmed that prosecutors had delved into the hospital case, but he said he would be "very surprised" if that was the focus of the investigation.

Patrick Connick, an attorney for the Liljeberg brothers, said neither of his clients had been summoned before the grand jury to testify about the case.

"Other than what they read in the paper, John and Robert Liljeberg have no knowledge of any investigation of Judge Porteous, and they have not been contacted by anyone regarding the investigation, " Connick said.

Levenson's attorney, Franz Zibilich, said his client is not a target of the investigation, and he would answer no questions about the grand jury proceedings. "They asked us to turn over some documents, and we did, " Zibilich said of prosecutors.

Danos' attorney, Pat Fanning, would not comment. Amato and his attorney, Ralph Capitelli, did not return calls this week.

Gardner, however, assailed the investigation as aimless and called prosecutors "evil" for wasting tax dollars on a desultory project.

"It's innuendoes. It's suggestions. It's this, it's that, it's the other, " Gardner said. "Tom Porteous would have never taken a dollar to fix a case a la Alan Green. . . . That's not his style." Green, a former judge, was convicted of bribery-related mail fraud almost a year ago.

Bill Rittenberg, a prominent New Orleans defense attorney not involved in the hospital case, said it is unlikely prosecutors would be fishing into the matter were they not truly interested. However, he said that without proof of a quid pro quo, it would be difficult for prosecutors to secure an indictment based solely on the judge's friendships with attorneys in his courtroom.

"A lot of us are friends with judges. Our classmates from law school become judges, " Rittenberg said. "I have argued before people I consider friends, and more often than not, I have gotten a raw deal. If there were no financial entanglements, I do not see a conflict of interest."

No time limit on leave
In the meantime, Schonekas said the investigation has placed "tremendous pressure" on his client, who is living in a rented house in Houma while his home in Metairie is under repair. Porteous continues to collect his $165,200 annual salary while he remains on medical leave.

At 59, Porteous is at least six years shy of the retirement age for federal judges. If he wanted to take permanent disability leave at the end of his furlough -- and continue receiving that salary -- he would have to persuade the chief judge of the 5th Circuit to send a letter to the president certifying he was permanently incapacitated.

Dick Carelli, a spokesman for the U.S. Courts Administrative Office, said there is no maximum amount of time a federal judge can remain on temporary leave. The length of the furlough is left to the discretion of the chief judge of the circuit court, in this case Judge Edith Jones.

However, Carelli said, an incapacitated judge might come under pressure from colleagues shouldering his caseload to apply for disability retirement.

When Porteous began his leave last month, the court clerk for the Eastern District of Louisiana distributed his entire docket of 248 civil cases among the 15 active judges at the court. Porteous had recused himself from hearing all cases involving the federal government, including all criminal cases, after his name surfaced in the Wrinkled Robe investigation of Jefferson Parish courthouse corruption. Porteous was a state judge there from 1984 to 1994.

Carelli said it is rare for federal judges to take extended medical leave. A year in which two or three were absent would be considered a high-volume year, he said.

Speculation about plea
Porteous' six-month furlough, coming amid the continuing criminal investigation, has stoked speculation that he might be hashing out the terms of a plea bargain with prosecutors or preparing to resign or face an indictment.

"The explanation that Judge Porteous gave for the leave -- that he had personal and family issues -- on its face is certainly credible, " said Dane Ciolino, a Loyola University professor who specializes in legal ethics. "It might also mean an indictment is imminent."

Schonekas said the judge has not signed a plea agreement. And he said the medical leave should not be read as part of a deal with prosecutors to resign.

Philip Hilder, who formerly headed the Houston field office of the Justice Department's Organized Crime Strike Force, said a judge negotiating a plea agreement would never step down from the bench before finalizing the terms, in case the deal falls through and he has to fight the charges in court.

Hilder speculated that if the government has the slightest case against such a high-ranking public official, it would not enter into an agreement to go away in return for the judge stepping down. He said the public would criticize the move as a slap on the wrist.

"It will either be all the marbles or nothing, " Hilder said. "A plea of guilty or nothing."